When Religious Advertising Violates Consumer Rights, by Isaac Asabor

As a journalist deeply entrenched in the realm of consumer affairs, I have come to understand the profound impact that advertising can have on people’s lives. Whether it is promoting the latest consumer goods or religious items, the promise of fulfilling a need or solving a problem is often at the heart of these messages. However, when these promises fail to deliver, not only is it a breach of trust, it is a violation of consumer law.

This brings us to the recent controversy brewing between Mr. Martins Vincent Otse, popularly known as Very Dark Man (VDM), a consumer rights activist and social commentator and Prophet Jeremiah Funfeyin, the founder and head prophet of Christ Mercyland Deliverance Ministry (CMDM), Effurun, Delta State, Nigeria. The core of this dispute lies in the alleged deceptive practices related to religious items and services, raising questions about where faith ends and consumer protection begins.

In many African countries, religion is a powerful force, with many turning to faith leaders for guidance, hope, and even solutions to their daily struggles. This trust, however, can be easily exploited. When religious leaders or institutions market items, whether they are anointed oils, holy water, or prayer cloths, promising miraculous outcomes, they are walking a fine line. If these items do not deliver the advertised results, they can be considered deceptive under consumer protection laws.

For instance, there was the notorious case involving South African preacher, Alph Lukau, who claimed to resurrect a man from the dead. This sparked widespread outrage and a subsequent investigation, highlighting the potential for exploitation in religious advertising.  This is as the pastor regretted the incident amidst several lawsuits with some critics challenging him to raise the late South African leader, Nelson Mandela, from the dead. Lukau, who runs the popular Alleluia Ministries, who undoubtedly struggled to come out from the quagmire he enmeshed himself in claimed that the supposed deceased was already alive when he arrived at his church. He made the somewhat confession to Power FM’s Power Drive host, Thabiso Tema, in South Africa.  Explaining how it all happened, he said he was busy with a sermon on Sunday when he was interrupted and told that a person in a coffin had been brought to the church.

“Before entering the premises of the church, the coffin began to shake, meaning the person was alive. I am really sorry for the misrepresentation of facts, the man was not dead, and has never been in the mortuary as we earlier said,” Lukau explained.

When asked by the host why the man had been brought to the church in the first place, Lukau said, “I am not sure if I can make a statement that he was brought to me.

“We are the house of God and I am just a pastor serving in the house of the Lord. But I am sorry that we did not tell people the truth in the first place,” he added.

Lukau noted that the man was brought to the church by his family, who believed that something would happen if he was prayed for, and added that further questions about why the man was brought to the church would be better answered by the man’s family.

“I think that they brought the person to church because they believed that God had the ability to resurrect the person, but still our brother was alive even before they brought him to church and we really apologize for not telling the truth in the first place,” he said.

During the interview, Lukau claimed the only time he restored life was to an unborn child whose mother had alleged that she had been told the child had died in the womb.

“The heartbeat could not be detected before but after the prayer, they were told the child is fine,” said Lukau.

The pastor, who found himself in the labyrinth of public scrutiny, also added that he had no power to resurrect a person from the dead “except if God used him as a vessel.

Meanwhile, a lawyer representing the controversial pastor’s church, Alleluia Ministries, denied allegations that the “resurrected” Brighton Moyo had been paid before to participate in “miracles”.

He was responding to several colleagues and friends of Moyo’s who said that he had told them it was not the first time he had played a starring role in showcasing miracles.

Also called “Elliot”, the man who was apparently resurrected by the controversial pastor had on a previous occasion been “healed” from being confined to a wheelchair, a colleague of his told Times LIVE, a South Africa’s news website.

However, in the ongoing dispute between VDM and Prophet Jeremiah, the claims at the center of the controversy revolve around the effectiveness of religious items marketed by Prophet Jeremiah. VDM has accused the prophet of exploiting vulnerable followers through deceptive advertising.

The accusations are serious, as they touch on the core of consumer rights in the Christendom. If religious items are marketed with the promise of miracles, but fail to deliver, it could be considered a violation of consumer law. This is not merely about the failure of a product but about the exploitation of people’s deepest beliefs and vulnerabilities.

What is happening between VDM and Prophet Jeremiah is not an isolated incident. Across the continent, there have been multiple cases where religious leaders have come under scrutiny for misleading their followers as in South African Lukau’s case. The broader implication is clear: consumer laws should apply equally to all sectors, including religious institutions, when they engage in commercial activities.

Against the foregoing backdrop, it is the duty of Journalists on Consumer Affairs beat in various media organizations to shine a light on these practices, ensuring that no one is above the law. Whether it is a consumer good or a religious item, the standards of truthfulness in advertising should be upheld. The integrity of both consumer protection and religious faith depends on it.

The controversy between VDM and Prophet Jeremiah should serve as a crucial reminder that consumer rights are universal, and that exploitation, no matter the context, is unacceptable. As this case unfolds, it may set a significant precedent for how religious advertising is regulated in Nigeria, nay across other African countries, potentially leading to stricter enforcement of consumer protection laws in the faith sector.

In his reaction to the controversy that is presently raging between VDM and Prophet Jeremiah, a Nigerian missionary priest, Rev Fr. Kelvin Ugwu posted on his Facebook, thus: “If I sell “holy water” or “anointing oil” to you and tell you that it will cure you of Korokoro. . . because I sold it to you and you bought it with your money, you deserve to get exactly what you paid for. This is a basic consumer protection law.

“It is not right that after paying for a product and the customer complained that it did not work, my only excuse is to tell the customer that he does not have faith. What faith are you talking about here?

“So, if faith is needed for my product to work, what prevented me from selling faith to my customers first and ensuring that only those who have bought faith will buy the holy water, perfume and oil?

“Or, to make it even better, what prevents me from stating boldly on all the products and adverts that they work ONLY for those who have bought faith?”

For the sake of clarity, is expedient at this juncture to recall that VDM has continued to challenge Pastor Jeremiah Fufeyin for selling his miracle soap and water to his church members.

In June, this year, Pastor Jeremiah had launched his miracle products, which include soap, water and perfume, among others. The clergyman said the miracle soap has NAFDAC approval.

This did not sit well with VDM, who criticized the products and in retaliation, the clergyman filed an N1billion lawsuit against him. VDM claimed the clergyman did not just sue him but also filed a restraining order and warned him not to speak about him again. Sharing the court document, the social media critic vowed to challenge him.

However, VDM who seems not disposed to give up the fight bought the miracle product, and consequently tested its potency on the deaf, blind and other disabled people in FCT, Abuja.

In a video shared on his Instagram page, the activist was seen in the midst of the blind and deaf giving them the water to drink, and he further shared another video of him mocking the pastor by dancing so hard.  The video triggered massive reactions as social media users shared their thoughts on the issue.

In his reaction to Prophet Jeremiah’s engagement of lawyer in the matter, Rev. Fr. Kelvin Ugwu wrote on his Facebook page, “On a normal-normal, if a supposed “unbeliever” doubts the miracle you claim you can perform in God’s name, you leave him to God or show practical evidence of your miracles. .

“Even Jesus did the same when Thomas doubted his resurrection, he appeared again to the disciples just to clear Thomas’ doubt and win him to himself.

But because we are in the abnormal-normal, you rather take the “unbeliever” to court to intimidate him for challenging you because you also believe in your own lies that you are the most powerful man of God and major prophet whom God gave the keys of life and death. Mtchwww!”

Meanwhile, it is expedient for us to keep our fingers crossed as the “Roforofo” fight between VDM and Pastor Jeremiah drags, and keep ruminating on whether the special place of religion in healing is recognized by law, not forgetting that religion occupies a special place in the hearts of men. Given the foregoing view, the question that would soon become a subject of debate in Nigeria is whether faith items and their efficacies should be subjected to consumer rights law or not.